HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL OF ONTARIO
B E T W E E N:
Michael DesRochers
Applicant
-and-
A.G. Simpson Inc. and Deborah Mauik
Respondents
INTERIM DECISION
Adjudicator: Brian Cook
Indexed as: DesRochers v. A.G. Simpson
1This is an Application filed on May 4, 2011 under section 34 of Part IV of the Human Rights Code, R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, as amended (the “Code”). This Interim Decision deals with the issue of whether the Application should be deferred pending the completion of a related grievance proceeding.
2The applicant indicated in the Application that the facts of the Application are part of a union grievance proceeding that is still in progress, and enclosed a copy of the grievance filed on his behalf by his union. He noted that in addition, he has a pending appeal before the Workplace Safety and Insurance Appeals Tribunal. The applicant advised the Tribunal that he wanted the Tribunal to defer further consideration of his Application until these other procedures were completed.
3On July 20, 2011, the Tribunal issued a Notice of Intent to Defer further consideration of the Application pending the conclusion of the grievance process.
4On August 25, 2011, the respondents advised the Tribunal that they agree that the Application should be deferred. The applicant has not sent any communication to the Tribunal since the Notice of Intent to Defer.
5The Tribunal may defer consideration of an application, on such terms as it may determine, and on its own initiative (Rule 14.1). The Tribunal has generally deferred applications where there is an ongoing grievance under a collective agreement based on the same facts and human rights issues.
6In this case, it is apparent that there is substantial overlap between the facts and human rights issues covered by the Application and those referred to in the grievance. Both parties agree that the Tribunal should defer until the grievance process is complete. The Application will therefore be deferred pending the completion of the grievance process.
7The Tribunal directs the parties’ attention to Rules 14.3 and 14.4, which outline the procedure by which the Application may be brought back on after the conclusion of the grievance process.
Dated at Toronto, this 7th day of October, 2011.
”signed by”_______
Brian Cook
Vice-chair